Congress members weigh in

Jul. 26, 2013

The Enquirer asked members of our congressional delegation whether government surveillance of U.S. citizens has gone too far and whether they would recommend any changes to the surveillance and data collection programs. Here are their responses. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., did not respond to our request; his comments were taken from his website.

No blank check to spy on AmericansRep. Steve Chabot is a Republican representing Ohio’s 1st District.

It is critically important that our security agencies take appropriate steps to protect our nation from future terrorist attacks, but the executive branch should not have a blank check to spy on Americans. Although the NSA’s surveillance activities were authorized by a federal judge, I think there are legitimate questions regarding the breadth of the information the agency is collecting about the American people – particularly about those persons not suspected of any illegal activity.

The federal government needs to strike an appropriate balance between national security and personal liberties, and Congress must monitor executive branch activities to help preserve this delicate balance. As a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee, I look forward to reviewing existing law to ensure that neither this nor any other administration can circumvent the Fourth Amendment to conduct unreasonable searches.

In the course of performing our oversight duty, Congress may very well find that we need to take corrective action to protect Americans’ rights, privacy and freedoms.

Collecting information a violation of libertyRep. Tom Massie is a Republican from Kentucky’s 4th District.

Our government has clearly violated the Fourth Amendment by collecting information on millions of Americans. Our country's war for independence was partially motivated by the king’s abuse of general warrants ... the equivalent of today’s indiscriminate snooping. In order to issue warrants, our founders wisely required “probable cause” and “particular descriptions of the persons and things to be seized” in the Fourth Amendment. Even today, those words leave no room for the well-intentioned but unhealthy domestic spying being practiced at the NSA. The president referenced the Patriot Act as congressional authorization for some of the government’s activity, but the bill’s author, Rep. Sensenbrenner, says that it was never the intent of his bill to allow for this type of data collection.

The process definitely needs to change, but unfortunately it’s getting worse. On April 18, 2013, I voted against the Cyber Information Sharing and Protection Act, legislation that literally entices private corporations into collecting and providing even more data to the federal government. It passed the House but has yet to pass the Senate. I’m an original co-sponsor of the LIBERT-E Act, which would make the secret FISA court rulings open to members of Congress and require that declassified versions of these rulings be made available to the public. It would also restrict data collection to individuals suspected of illegal activity. Finally, I’m co-sponsoring an amendment to the Defense Appropriations Bill that would provide that no funds in the appropriation will be used to collect information on individuals who are not suspected of illegal activity.

Federal government should not have a blank checkSen. Rand Paul is a Republican from Kentucky.

In the last nine years, the federal government has expanded the scope of its power at an alarming rate, while blatantly ignoring the Constitution.

Whether it’s passing the 315-page Patriot Act without a single member of Congress ever reading the bill, proposing a National ID Card, establishing FISA courts and utilizing warrantless searches, or betraying the medical privacy of ordinary citizens, the federal government has overstepped its limited powers as stipulated in the Constitution.

I believe that America can successfully protect itself against potential terrorists without sacrificing civil liberties, and I reject the premise that the Federal Government must be given a blank check in the name of national security.

My main objection to the Patriot Act is that searches that should require a warrant from a judge are performed with a letter from an FBI agent - a National Security Letter (NSL). Since the passage of the Patriot Act, over 200,000 NSL searches have been performed.

Privacy of citizens should be protectedSen. Rob Portman is a Republican from Terrace Park.

The nature of the terrorist threat has blurred many of the lines of traditional foreign versus domestic information collection. While we need to ensure we use the available tools to defend our country, we need to make sure these national security tools remain focused on defending us from our enemies. We need to get this right and make sure the privacy of U.S. citizens is protected. I have to say that the recent examples of this administration’s targeting of U.S. citizens due to their political beliefs does little to reinforce our confidence in the federal government using information appropriately. We’re taking another look at these programs to ensure we’re striking the right balance here.

Regardless of what you think about the surveillance program, Edward Snowden’s actions have jeopardized the security of this country. In addition, his trips to China and Russia and attempts to seek asylum in other anti-American countries with a history of repression and state surveillance undermine his claim to be acting on behalf of individual liberties.

He has said that he wants a debate about surveillance programs, but the way to encourage that debate is not to flee the country and serve as a propaganda tool for countries who want nothing more than to draw attention away from their own, far more intrusive surveillance programs.

Technology should not trample libertiesRep. Brad Wenstrup is a Republican from Ohio’s 2nd District.

My tour of duty in Iraq brought me face to face with terrorists we hear about in the news. This experience widened my perspective about our global war on terror. There are truly evil people who wish for nothing more than to harm Americans. I have seen their victims, American troops and innocent civilians, on the operating table.

Two of the founding roles of our federal government are to secure our liberties and provide for the common defense. Current intelligence programs have thwarted numerous plots targeting Americans. I have reviewed the documents; lives have been saved. At the same time, our intelligence agencies cannot operate independent of the law and Constitution. I am committed to upholding our right against unreasonable searches and seizures.

As technology continues to expand, we must continually re-examine methods of surveillance.

Twenty-first century technologies cannot trample timeless liberties. The important checks of judicial warrants and congressional oversight, which are currently in place, attempt to balance against executive overreach. We must ensure that these checks are more than mere nods to constitutional formalities.